Agenda item

Report by the Director for Planning & Place (PN8).

 

This is for two planning applications at and near to existing waste operations in the Green Belt at Worton, near Yarnton and Cassington. One proposal (MW.0091/17) seeks to remove part of a bund on land within the existing waste recycling permission to create car parking. The second proposes the permanent retention of a temporary skip storage operation.

 

Both applications are in the Green Belt and therefore have to be reported to this committee because they are departures from the development plan.

 

The report outlines the relevant planning policies along with the comments and recommendation of the Director for Planning and Place.

 

The main issue with the applications are their Green Belt location. In the case of MW.0091/17 it is considered that very special circumstances exist for the application and therefore the recommendation is to approve. However, in the case of MW.0090/17 it is not considered that very special circumstances have been shown and the recommendation is to refuse.

 

It is RECOMMENDED that:

 

(a)         planning permission for application no. MW.0091/17 be approved subject to conditions to be determined by the Director of Planning and Place to include the following:

-               Detailed Compliance

-               Development to be carried out within 3 years.

-               Details of landscaping to be approved.

-               Details and location of at least two bat and bird boxes to be approved.

-               Drainage details to be approved.

-               Permitted development rights removed.

 

(b)         planning permission for application no MW.0090/17 be refused. It would be inappropriate development in the Oxford Green Belt and no very special circumstances to justify making an exception had been demonstrated. The application would therefore be contrary to policy C12 of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy, policy ESD 14 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2031 and National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 87, 88 and 90.

 

The Committee considered two planning applications at and near to existing waste operations in the Green Belt at Worton, near Yarnton and Cassington. One (MW.0091/17) sought to remove part of a bund on land within the existing waste recycling permission to create car parking. The second proposed the permanent retention of a temporary skip storage operation.

 

Mr Broughton advised on an amendment to the plan at page 59 and then presented the applications.

 

Application MW.0091/17

 

On behalf of the applicants Mrs Coyne welcomed the officer recommendation for approval but not the proposed removal of permitted development rights, particularly as that had not been recommended in 2007. There was no clear justification now to recommend its removal which she considered would be unlawful and advised that the applicants would appeal that decision if agreed. She had raised this issue with officers in July 2017 but had received no response. There were in any event limitations and controls on what could be built and the principle of the development could not be changed, which is why removal was being opposed.

 

Mr Mytton advised that officers considered removal of the permitted development rights condition met the 6 tests as set out in the NPPF and it was incorrect to suggest that because this condition for removal hadn’t been attached before that it couldn’t be now on the basis of what might have changed. It was the officer view that the proposed bund removal and car parking constituted inappropriate development in the Green Belt and removal of permitted development rights would not materially alter the development.

 

Mrs Coyne then responded to questions from:

 

Councillor Johnston – there was case law on this point and in the applicant’s view the removal of permitted development rights condition fundamentally changed the development and there was no justification for it.

 

Councillor Fox-Davies – she confirmed that the applicants were satisfied with conditions 1 – 3 but not 4.

 

Councillor Reynolds – her clients were doing a good job in managing the recycling operation at this site and a proposed extension was urgently required in order to maintain those levels of excellence.

 

Councillor Reynolds felt that it would be open to the applicant to apply separately for the necessary permission and on that basis moved the revised recommendation as set out in the addenda sheet.  Councillor Johnston seconded the motion.

 

Councillor Sames did not consider the proposed changes constituted inappropriate development.

 

Councillor Gawrysiak accepted the legal advice given by county officers.

 

Councillor Webber reminded members that the threat of appeal was not a material planning consideration.

 

The motion was then put to the Committee and carried by 8 votes to 5. See resolution (a) below.

 

Mr Broughton then presented application MW.0090/17.

 

Suzi Coyne referred to the email that she had sent to members of the Committee prior to the meeting explaining that the application for the storage of skips was an essential part of the waste recycling operation at this site. In the normal course of things there would be 1000 skips in use but there was also a need for reserves to be stored on site. Currently the facility was outgrowing demand and it was neither financially or economically viable to move elsewhere. Contrary to the officers’ view the applicant considered that very special circumstances had been demonstrated for the site to remain and it continued to be an important location for this type of operation. Recognising the government’s commitment to sustaining economic growth every effort had been made to foster the site’s continuing success and in so doing securing employment for 70 people. The applicants had made a large recent investment in machinery and refusal now would jeopardise the future of the site. She considered it unreasonable to have published a second reason for refusal just prior to the meeting.

 

Recognising the need to protect the Green Belt Councillor Phillips agreed with the officers’ view that no very special circumstances had been demonstrated.

 

However, Councillor Sames did not feel that was the case and in view of the type of site already there this was not a visual amenity issue and he could not accept that this would cause further harm to the Green Belt.

 

Mr Broughton advised that officers were not specifying harm to the visual amenity but rather seeking to prevent urban sprawl. This was new development and in his view inappropriate.

 

Mr Periam added that the applicant had put their case as had county officers and it was for the Committee to now reach a decision on the appropriateness of the development.

 

RESOLVED: that

 

(a)         (on a motion by Councillor Reynolds, seconded by Councillor Johnston and carried by 8 votes to 5) planning permission for application no. MW.0091/17 be approved subject to conditions to be determined by the Director of Planning and Place to include the following:

 

(1)  Detailed Compliance

(2)  Development to be carried out within 3 years.

(3)  Drainage details of the car park area to be approved.

(4)  Permitted development rights to be removed.

 

(b)      (on a motion by the Chairman, seconded by Councillor Johnston and carried by 8 votes to 4) that planning permission for application no MW.0090/17 be refused for the following reasons:

 

(1)      It would be inappropriate development in the Oxford Green Belt and no very special circumstances to justify making an exception have been demonstrated. The application would therefore be contrary to policy C12 of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy, policy ESD 14 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2031 and National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 87, 88 and 90.

 

(2)    It would be contrary to the priorities for locating waste facilities as set out in policy W5 of the Oxfordshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy.